Using a combination of qualitative data collection methods to collect data rapidly from a place on a particular topic is not a novel idea. Rapid participatory and qualitative appraisal approaches have been used in many different settings for the past 40 years, with the influential scholar Robert Chambers, and those he worked with, doing much to shape the practice from the 1970s. The methods spread beyond a rural, agriculture focus (Chambers, 1994) to embrace urban settings and the assessment of health and other areas of interest as well as settings in the Global North as well as South (Annett and Rifkin, 1995, Murray et al., 1994). I first used these approaches in the 1980s, while working in the Annapurna foothills in Nepal at an agricultural research station. We established the practice of a one week data collection exercise, which we called a `Combined Trek’ where a group of scientists from different disciplines, including me – a social anthropologist – systematically collected information using interviews, observations and discussions in a village and the surrounding area – working closely with the local people. Our purpose was to inform future agricultural interventions, building from what people were already doing. Cecilia Vindrola-Padros and Ginger Johnson (2020) detail in a review article how different qualitative methods have been adapted to be used to collect data rapidly. The need for speed, as they explain, has been a response to the increasing pressure many of us are under to deliver study findings quickly. Their review sets out how conventional methods have been adapted to be used rapidly in different settings. Among the combination of methods that they describe is the `rapid ethnographic assessment’. This assessment approach has grown as a response of anthropologists to pressure to produce results far more quickly that more conventional ethnographic approaches would allow. This set of methods is described in detail in the recent manual produced by Sangaramoorthy and Kroeger (2020). We are not, therefore, claiming that the approach set out in this manual is particularly novel nor indeed unique. The Broad Brush Survey, described in this manual is an approach originally developed by Valdo Pons (1993, 1996) and further developed and popularized through the work of Sandra Wallman (1996), which can be used to capture both the landscape and ‘feel’ of a community and the people in it. The research findings can be used to shape further investigators or interventions to address the problem at hand in a useful and practical manner rapidly, succinctly and systematically. This `Broad Brush Survey’ approach manual is, therefore, a contribution to the burgeoning literature on methods for rapid qualitative data collection methods and assessment. The use of the word ‘survey’ in the title of the set of methods may be perplexing to those who consider the term to be synonymous with `questionnaire’. This 6 is not the way we use the word – the Oxford English Dictionary offers several definitions of word `survey’, which include `the act of viewing, examining, or inspecting in detail [...] for some specific purpose’ and `the, or an, act of looking at something as a whole from a commanding position; a general or comprehensive look’. Both definitions convey the sense of our intention: to engage with, and in, a community for a short but concentrated period of time, seeking quickly, but thoroughly, to take a comprehensive look at the place for a specific purpose, and document the place at that moment in time. As we explain in the first chapter, the approach is systematic with a defined sequence of qualitative data collection methods, which gradually allows the user to build an understanding of place and people. The combination of methods used, however, is not set in stone and can be adapted to suit the purpose at hand. As such we hope that this manual serves as a guide to the possibilities which using this approach can offer both for those working in interdisciplinary projects as well as those from anthropology and sociology, for example, laying the groundwork for in-depth longitudinal research.